Letter from Rob Richie

March 2003

Dear Supporter of Fair Elections,

Thanks to support from you and from literally hundreds of other
volunteers and donors, San Francisco made history exactly one year ago,
on March 5, 2002 , when it became the first major American city to
adopt instant runoff voting for all major offices.

It was a great victory, won over the opposition of downtown leaders who
spent more than $100,000 in their efforts to maintain December runoff
elections. These interests apparently prefer traditional delayed
runoffs that, when compared to same-day instant runoff voting
elections, increase candidates’ reliance on campaign donors, increase
opportunities to attack opponents, decrease voter turnout and decrease
opportunities to build coalitions across racial lines.

But the campaign is far from over. We need your renewed support to head off a below-the-radar campaign to keep the status quo.

Yes, implementation of instant runoff voting (IRV) is very much at
risk. Despite ongoing pressure and assistance from our San Francisco
staffers Caleb Kleppner and Steven Hill, opponents have started a
whisper campaign that IRV won’t be in place this fall, leading to
several news articles repeating these doubts – never mind the
unambiguous language in the charter amendment approved by voters. Even
more worrisome, city bureaucrats have completely stalled in
establishing new voting procedures, apparently counting on the fact
that the City will have to postpone this year’s IRV elections if they
aren’t ready to hold them.

Fortunately, we have many allies, including a majority of the Board of
Supervisors, new California Secretary of State Kevin Shelley and the
City’s leading civic groups. We also know that there is absolutely no
technical reason to avoid implementing IRV. But the clock is ticking.

We are taking several steps to ensure San Francisco respects the will
of its voters. Tonight, we will pack a meeting of the Election
Commission, with letters from a wide array of civic and political
leaders calling for implementation of IRV. We are preparing for the
possibility that if the City fails to adapt its voting equipment, it
must count IRV ballots by hand, not postpone the elections. We are
working every possible inside connection, yet at the same time are
planning for public protests at City Hall and even a major lawsuit.

In short, in the tradition of our campaign to win IRV last year, we simply will refuse to lose.

Once we win the battle assuring a 2003 election with IRV, our job in
San Francisco of course will be far from over. We must keep the
pressure on to ensure instant runoff voting is implemented well. We
will pursue effective community education efforts to help voters
understand IRV, partnering with groups that work with people of color
and language minorities. We will track and assist the City in every
step it takes to run these elections, highlighting and correcting any
decision that could undercut a smooth election.

The stakes in this year’s effort are high. The future of the IRV
movement may well depend on a successful IRV election in San Francisco
because so many cities, counties and states are watching this election.
If things go smoothly, we expect the reform to spread rapidly in the
next few years to cities around California and states across the
nation. But a poorly run election could kill interest in many areas
currently considering IRV.

Ann Arbor, Michigan provides one example. Its 1975 mayoral race was the
last public election in the United States using IRV. Even though voter
error decreased in half from the previous mayoral race held under
traditional plurality rules and even though the system worked exactly
as planned in ensuring the majority party won despite a split vote, a
poorly run election killed IRV It took the city an entire week to
determine a winner. Controversy swirled around the election, and IRV
was repealed in a low-turnout special election the following spring.

We must avoid that fate in San Francisco, but it requires work. Since
before Proposition A passed in March 2002, we’ve been working with the
Department of Elections and other city officials on all aspects of
implementation, including designing a comprehensive voter education
program. We have held numerous meetings with community leaders and
potential candidates.

We confront these great challenges in San Francisco even as at the same
time we promote fair elections around the country. A dozen states have
introduced IRV legislation this year, and several bills for IRV and
full representation systems have a real chance to pass at least one
house of a legislature. Colleges such as Duke, Vassar, William and Mary
and University of California – Davis have adopted IRV. We are an
indispensable resource for backers of these efforts.

Unfortunately, we face sharp reductions in foundation support. This is
a problem affecting almost all non-profits, but particularly groups
promoting new ideas. Last year for the second year in a row, we doubled
our support from individuals, but lost several major grants. To
maintain our current momentum for fair elections, we need even more
support from individuals in 2003.

In short, you played a key role in passing Proposition A in San
Francisco, and we need your support once again to make fair elections a
reality in the United States. Could you make a generous contribution to
preserve last year’s victory for IRV and ensure implementation goes
successfully?

Finally, we are attaching an action alert to generate calls, faxes and
letters to public officials urging them to sign a contract with the
voting equipment vendor. We hope those of you in San Francisco can take
a few minutes today to contact the public officials listed.

Sincerely,

Rob Richie, executive director

P.S. Please note that two generous donors have joined to provide a
$20,000 matching grant that ends on March 31. Every dollar you give
this month will become two!